Comments on: Congress: P2P networks harm national security
House of Representatives panel chairman says peer-to-peer networks pose a "national security threat," new laws needed.
House of Representatives panel chairman says peer-to-peer networks pose a "national security threat," new laws needed.
December 28, 2009 2:39 PM PST
December 28, 2009 1:39 PM PST
December 28, 2009 12:45 PM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
computer and storing sensitive data in the shared folder......Then
whose fault is that?
Wow, stereotype much?
Waxman is just ******* for the MPAA and software manufacturers. It's absurdly transparent. Vote the rotten bum out.
You're right, what idiots!
By the way, very simple stop to it, on the network firewall block the common ports used for point to point sharing. WOW hard thing that national security stuff!
data, etc., were handled, computers containing such were not
allowed onto a network at all, at least where I worked. It sounds
like that's not the case anymore.
So I will do my best to make this as simple as possible for someone like a US Senator or a congressman.
The government should not hire people that install file sharing on the same machines that they have classified information on. This would be equivalent of having someone taking home a bunch of classified documents they printed out and stuffed in a backpack with a broken zipper.
Congress, would this mean that backpacks with broken zippers are a threat to national security? I honestly think it is our hiring and electing process, but I could be wrong, of course I doubt it.
I think efficient open distribution protocols like bittorent are the least of their problems. As they say, "Look within."
Typed in Ubuntu/Firefox/Colemak.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure no one has an interest in "government secrets". Most of them seem to involve people like John Lennon anyhow.
a classified computer to leave the classified info repository without
being shredded.
[i]Deep in NSA headquarters, it was 4am in the Mother NOC. All was quiet as data by the petabyte slipped quietly along Teh Intawebs...
Suddenly, an operative leaps from his desk and rushes to the General's desk, sweat puring from his brow and his breath coming in short pants. He wasn't tired... he was scared.
The General tried to calm him, but the operative shoved a piece of paper under the General's nose in reply.
As the Gray-haired officer began reading the missive, his eyes began to show fear. Fear he hadn't experienced since 'Nam. Fear that grabs a fistful of intestine and yanks downwards... hard.
And on the paper, there was but a simple note, with a source header that pointed to somewhere in China:"
[b]"LOLz Im in UR Intarwebz downl04d1nG y3r tR4nzf0rm3rz m00v33!"[/b]
- sheyah - what the frig ever.
Thanks Mr. Reid, for proving that the Democrat Party can be just as drop-stupid, brain-dead, and tech-ignorant as the rest of the friggin' political spectrums' respective ruling classes.
Idiot.
/P
The IT guys should have only the software on the machines that these 'government employees' need and lock down the machine.
Oh, and the reason that the IT for the government can be frustrating.. check out the pay scale for them! they're only slightly better paid than normal GS-grade pay scale! Oh, and dont' go blaming everything on internal IT, you'd be veeerry surprised to know how much IT and software coding is outsourced to companies in the US (not overseas, it's illegal to outsource any Federal Government work outside of the US).
Firing a federal employee is nearly impossible. There's also a "rule" floating around that in order to understand a government buraucracy, assume it is run by it's worst enemy. The people in charge gain status by having more subordinates, so inefficient subordinates are cherished, so long as they do not draw anyone's attention.
P.S. Gas is three bucks a gallon here and it's putting people out of business. Can you fix that? Or fix my nearly worthless health insurance and our delapidated rural school system? Iraq????
still in office. No indication of increased intelligence detectable.
Yes, P2P is one way, but there are QOS tools to disallow P2P traffic.
What is next? Going after cars because they are murder weapons?
Why didn't we ban airplanes? They are a weapon of mass destruction.
installing software on their computers without the systems
administrator's permission (which I seriously doubt they are
allowed to do in the first place). In other words some moron is
trying to use 911 as an excuse to limit piracy online.
they need to stop exploiting such national tragedy.
Waxman has been Subpoena-ing the sh*t out of the Bush Administration for Lying about the evidence to go to War.
None of the data breaches discussed in the hearing took place on government agencies' enterprise networks. Waxman discussed legislation to do exactly what you just proposed, except extend it to PRIVATE contractors and vendors who handle government data.
Do you really agree with CNET that everyone should just ignore this problem and hope it goes away?
This is nothing more than a ridiculous excuse for the power-mad (who have, quite frankly, illegally seized-control within the United States) to further tighten the screws... and, even further, bury any shred of lingering freedom.
This is about, effectively, criminalizing "unregulated" and un-controlled Internet-use. In fact, this is actually about extending absolute Government, and special-interest, CONTROL over virtually ANY private-technology.
Anyone who has actually been following such legislative-actions... so-called, "private" computer-security initiatives, such as, "Trusted Computing"... and the endless scare-tactics used by "our" Government ("The War on drugs", "The War on crime", and now, "The War on Terrorism"), to cow the citizens into giving up their most basic-rights... has known that this was coming, for years.
It is so, painfully, obvious what... and, WHO, is actually behind this... Which is why I cannot believe that ANYONE could actually still fall for these, perennial "...security", "safety", and "...terrorism", lines of COMPLETE-BS, anymore.
But, then, what do you expect in a country that compliantly-abandoned its freedom, and no longer has any semblance of a legitimate government (the Federal-Government lost ALL claims to legitimacy when they effectively, permanently suspended the U.S. Constitution, Habeas Corpus, the Rule-Of-Law, began illegally spying on Americans, ...and, especially, when the "Executive-Branch", flat-out, declared itself above the "...will of the people", and utterly beyond the reach of ANY LAW... what-so-ever... in ANY matter that it arbitrarily chooses.
Oh, but... We are at "WAR"...
Oh, and, "enemies" are just everywhere...
And, we just have to do whatever "the Government" ORDERS us to do... Dont we..?
Well...
Welcome to ABSOLUTE TYRANNY...
I'm sorry to say I see my government (I'm dutch) taking the same route...
They need to talk to S JOBS and EMI and just maybe they have a model that actually may work!
I sickens me that either:
a. The government feels we are too incompentant to manage employees who abuse their workplace, have no work ethics, etc.
OR
b. Thinks we are stupid enough to believe this is a technology problem. Why not just take the computers away. That's the true source of the risk anyway. All it takes is an employee browsing the wrong web site on an unpatched browser and say bye-bye to anything private on your computer. Now where is P2P in that picture?
Any rep or senator from my state that speaks for or votes for any such legislation is definintly NOT getting my vote.
I wonder who's contributing to Waxman's coffers...
Hollywood. MPAA.
Did they ban NFS because of it?
/P
- Practical solutions
- by bluemist9999 July 25, 2007 6:30 AM PDT
- If a computer contains sensitive information, the computer should NOT have peer-to-peer software installed. So, why are government employees installing such software on their work systems?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 4 pages (154 Comments)I think any system containing such sensitive information should not even be connected to the Internet.
So why is that the peer-to-peer software maker's problem?